AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Murgesen, J.—This Criminal Appeal is directed against the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned II Additional District and
Sessions Judge (Protection of Civil Rights), Thanjavur, dated 14.06.2002, made in S.C. No. 234 of 1998, on the appellant/accused.
The case of the prosecution is as under:- P.W. 1-Kumanan is a businessman. He knew the accused and one Senthil. The accused and one
Senthil used to tease the girls. On 10.08.1995 at 9.00 P.M., when P.W. 1 and his friends viz., deceased Dhanasekaran, P.W. 3-Vasu @
Balakrishnan and P.W. 4-Raja @ Manivannan went to the house of Senthil and questioned them, the accused and Senthil had thrown stones on
them. At that time P.W. 2-Siva @ Sivanesan, P.W. 3, P.W. 4 and P.W. 5-Senbagavalli were present. P.W. 1 and the deceased Dhanasekaran
sustained injuries in the stone throwing and they were taken to Tanjavur Medical College Hospital by P.W. 2 and P.W. 4.
On 10.08.1995 at 9.45 P.M., the deceased Dhanasekaran was examined by P.W. 9-Dr. Gunaseelan and he issued Ex. P. 3-A.R. Copy. He
found the following injuries:
Contusion over right temple region 2"" x 2"" with abrasion over it 2cm x 2cm with blood stain.
P.W. 1 was first examined by P.W. 11-Dr. Balakrishnan and he gave a chit Ex. P. 5. Then P.W. 1 was examined by P.W. 12-Dr. Joseph
Victor and he made an endorsement Ex. P. 6 to take X-Ray in the chit Ex. P. 5.
On 12.08.1995 at 5.40 A.M., Dhanasekaran was found dead by P.W. 10- Dr. Mahadevan and he sent intimation Ex. P. 4 to the Police. On
receipt of the death intimation, Rathinasabapathy, Sub Inspector of Police, Tanjavur East Police Station went to the hospital and obtained Ex. P.
1-Statement from P.W. 1 and registered a case in Crime No. 930 of 1995 under Sections 336 and 302 I.P.C. Ex. P. 9 is the printed F.I.R. The
printed F.I.R. was despatched to the Judicial Magistrate and the copy was sent to the Investigating officer through P.W. 7- Kannan, Head
Constable.
P.W. 15-Raja, the investigating officer on 12.08.1995 at 9.45 A.M., took up the case for investigation and visited the scene of occurrence and
prepared Ex. P. 2-Observation Mahazar and Ex. P. 10-Rough Sketch in the presence of Kesavan and P.W. 6-Gopalakrishnan. Then he
conducted inquest over the body of the deceased and prepared Ex. P. 11-Inquest Report. Then, P.W. 15 sent the body of the deceased for
conducting postmortem along with Ex. P. 6, requisition letter through P.W. 8-Mahalaingam, Head Constable.
Postmortem was conducted by P.W. 13-Dr. Vijayalakshmi. She examined the body of the deceased and gave Ex. P. 7-postmortem certificate.
On examination she found the following the following injuries:
External Injuries:
Abrasion 2x2 cms. over the Rt. temple region 4 cms. outer to the lateral end of Rt. eye with surrounding contusion seen.
Inverted ''U'' shaped surgical sutured wound 32 cm. long over the Rt. fronto parieto temporal area with the opening of the U in front of the Rt.
ear. Internal Injuries:
On reflecting the scalp contusion involving the whole of Rt. side of the scalp seen. Surgical removal of bone over the Rt. fronto-parietal and
temporal bones over an area of 10 x 9 cms. With gel foan seen.
On Opening the skull, subdural and subarachnoid haemorrhages on both cerebral hemispheres with dural tearat the Rt. temporal region seen.
Laceration of brain 4 x 3 x .cm. over the base and lateral aspects of Rt. temporal lobe present.
On dissection Intraventricular haemorrhage and petechial haemorrhage in the mid brain area seen.
A fissured fracture running across the whole of Rt. middle cranial fossa found extending to pituitary fossa seen.
The doctor opined that the deceased would appear to have died of Head Injuries.
After postmortem, P.W. 8 recovered M.O.1-Bloodstained eight cubit dhothi from the body of the deceased and handed over the same to P.W.
On 12.08.1995, P.W. 15 enquired P. Ws.1 to 3, Subbiah Nadar, Jeyaraman, P. Ws.5 and 6, Kesavan, Ramraj, Shanmugam, Kandamani
and Kalyanasundaran and recorded their statements. On 13.08.1995, at 7.30 P.M. he arrested the accused and sent him to judicial custody. On
14.08.1995, he sent a letter to the Judicial Magistrate to obtain the Age certificate for the accused. Based on the request of the Judicial Magistrate,
on 25.08.1995 P.W. 14-Dr. Shivakozhunthu took four X-Rays M.Os.2 to 5 on the accused and issued Ex. P. 8 Age Certificate that the accused
was aged above 16 and below 18.
Then P.W. 15 enquired P. Ws.7 and 8, Manoharan, P. Ws.9 to 14 and recorded their statements. After enquiring the witnesses and after
completing the investigation, on 28.10.1995, he filed charge sheet against the accused u/s 302 I.P.C.
Before the trial Court, P. Ws.1 to 15 were examined and Exs.P. 1 to P. 12 and M.Os.1 to 5 were marked. All the incriminating pieces of
evidence let in by the prosecution witnesses were put to the accused u/s 313(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure questioning the accused, and
the accused denied the same as false. On the side of the accused Exs.D1 to D4 were marked. There was no oral evidence adduced on the side of
the accused.
On consideration of the evidence on record, the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge (Protection of Civil Rights), Thanjavur,
found the appellant/accused guilty under Sections 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment.
Challenging the judgment of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge (Protection of Civil Rights), Thanjavur, the present Criminal
Appeal has been filed by the appellant/accused.
Now the question that needs to be answered in this appeal is whether the accused/appellant could be held guilty u/s 302 I.P.C.
P.W. 1-Kumanan is a businessman and he knew the appellant/accused and Senthil. The accused and Senthil used to tease the girls. This was
known to P. Ws.1 to 5. On 10.08.1995 at 9.00 P.M., when P.W. 1 along with P. Ws.3 and 4 and deceased Dhanasekaran went to the house of
Senthil and questioned them about the teasing the girls, the accused started to throw stones on them. P.W. 1 and the deceased Dhanasekaran
sustained injuries. The injuries sustained by P.W. 1 and Dhanasekaran were spoken by P.W. 9-Dr. Gunaseelan, P.W. 11-Dr. Balakrishnan and
P.W. 12-Dr. Joseph Victor.
Learned Counsel for the appellant stressed that he is arguing the case only for the modification of the conviction to Section 323 I.P.C. because
the accused had no intention to murder the deceased and he has caused only simple injury on the deceased.
We perused the evidence of witnesses carefully and meticulously. The evidence on record would clearly shows that the accused had no
intention to cause death of the accused and the evidence of P. Ws.2 to 4 would show that the stone thrown by the accused had caused only simple
injury on the victim and the accused did not cause the head injury, which resulted in his death. So, on a careful consideration of the evidence on
record, we are of the considered opinion that it is proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant/accused has caused simple injury to the
deceased so, he is liable to be punished only u/s 323 I.P.C. instead of Section 302 I.P.C.
Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is partly allowed and the conviction of the appellant/accused u/s 302 I.P.C. by the Trial Court is modified to
one u/s 323 I.P.C. and the sentence of life imprisonment imposed by the trial Court stands modified to 6 month Rigorous Imprisonment. The
period of imprisonment already undergone by the appellant/accused shall be given set off.